User talk:ToonNicker3
Plagiarism You seem pretty quick to label things as plagiarism. First, it's a bit harsh. The people that have been adding the pages are just trying to help out. They're not really claiming the information as their own. Second, any concerns about plagiarism are easily fixed. All we have to do is just add the template to the page and put in the name of the Wikipedia page in place of the "x". Then it is properly licensed information that can stay on the wiki until it can be updated and re-written. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 03:20, December 21, 2011 (UTC) : But then the unnecessary redlinks end up in the Wanted Pages when they're not wanted. Pages unrelated to Nickelodeon--ToonNicker3 12:25, December 21, 2011 (UTC) Anubis Well, I noticed the same thing as well. I was thinking splitting the hour long episodes into two parts the first one "blah blah / blah blah" then the other "blah blagh / blah blah". I think that's what you were trying to ask me. I guess I was kinda confused with your wording, don't worry I do the same thing a lot. XD, is that okay? --If your undies are tight, it's uncomfortable. If you're a boy and your bra is tight, I'm uncomfortable 04:05, January 8, 2012 (UTC) I was asking that the episodes be named by the first episode in the pair/quartet, and in the article, the plot synopsis would be divided into subheadings named by the episode. For example, House of Hush/House of Spies/House of Sting/House of Never/House of Forever would simply be called "House of Hush" and the plot summary would be formatted as Plot Summary House of Hush summary House of Spies House of Spies summary House of Sting House of Sting summary House of Never House of Never summary House of Forever House of Forever summary The opening paragraph would explain what other episodes encompass the article titled by the first one. Notice that this should only be done for House of Anubis. You understand what I intend?--ToonNicker3 04:34, January 8, 2012 (UTC) Yeah, I don't know about that. Anyways, no it's not about your contributions, I wanted to discuss some future plans. The chat link is on the side bar as you go down a page. You can also find it on the new top thing. --If your undies are tight, it's uncomfortable. If you're a boy and your bra is tight, I'm uncomfortable 00:33, January 13, 2012 (UTC) Alright, I'm waiting for you to respond--ToonNicker3 00:39, January 13, 2012 (UTC) Futility Okay. First, making a blog will do you something and that's what I'm giving you here. Since you never have got how I think in the past, just make a blog with a poll. Whichever person with the most votes gets to do it their way. It's simple. I can always block you, I have the rights to. You promised to try and see other peoples opinions, prove that you actually promised to that. --If your undies are tight, it's uncomfortable. If you're a boy and your bra is tight, I'm uncomfortable 01:57, January 15, 2012 (UTC) A voting system won't work in a place like this. Why are you threatening me when somebody already confronted you? You tell me to go get other peoples' opinions but obviously that won't work when your only other admin is a figurehead. The notable sketches parameter is redundant when there's an entire template devoted to sketches. However, removing the parameter doesn't make sense when the sketches make the show. It's much easier replacing the parameter with the two parameters in the sketch template. Know what I mean? Polls and bogs are unnecessary.--ToonNicker3 02:39, January 15, 2012 (UTC) That may be correct about the template but I've had it with you. Your bad attitude makes it hard for me to give you chances. I don't want you to question why you are being banned because I have all rights to ban you. These are my reasons to ban you: Insulting an admin (above), being rude to me (don't really care about this one as much as the others), You are Jack (you told me you were, you can't deny it), I gave you three chances and in this one I'd thought you would change and you still haven't. I mean you've changed a little but not enough to cooperate with people, and you've made sockpuppet accounts (that is making accounts after you were banned. Don't say you have not.) Goodbye Jack for the fiftyseventh time. --If your undies are tight, it's uncomfortable. If you're a boy and your bra is tight, I'm uncomfortable 02:50, January 15, 2012 (UTC) What insult did I throw at you? I have every right to say when KI think an admin is doing something wrong--ToonNicker3 02:53, January 15, 2012 (UTC) Does 'figure head' mean nothing to you? --If your undies are tight, it's uncomfortable. If you're a boy and your bra is tight, I'm uncomfortable 02:54, January 15, 2012 (UTC) I wasn't calling you the figurehead. Read what I had said before making such false accusations against me. Now please unblock me. I had no right to be blocked--ToonNicker3 02:56, January 15, 2012 (UTC) You called RRabbit a figure head, he is an admin you know. What right do I have to unblocking you? You are Jack, you have a sock puppet account (probably 6 of them), and you won't change even though I've given you three chances. I actually thought you could change, it's not my fault you couldn't. --If your undies are tight, it's uncomfortable. If you're a boy and your bra is tight, I'm uncomfortable 03:02, January 15, 2012 (UTC) I called him a figurehead because that's what you called him, but in more words. You said you would give me 5 days. If at least 3 of those 5 days were on good behavior, I would keep my account for at least a while, no matter how many sockpuppets you claim I have. Please follow through on your promise and give me the 5 days to prove myself worthy of staying. I am working on 10 articles right now doing intense research. All of them now can't be submitted because you blocked me. For the good of the encyclopedia, please unblock me. Fine. Whatever but I didn't call RRabbit mean things and I don't remember me giving you 5 days but since you are doing intense research on ten pages then I'll keep you. If you're going to revert my edits for a second time, make a blog. RRabbit is barely on here anyways. It'll probably be Jeremy breaking the tie. --If your undies are tight, it's uncomfortable. If you're a boy and your bra is tight, I'm uncomfortable 03:09, January 15, 2012 (UTC) My IP address wasn't unblocked--ToonNicker3 18:11, January 15, 2012 (UTC) Unblocked it. --If your undies are tight, it's uncomfortable. If you're a boy and your bra is tight, I'm uncomfortable 19:18, January 15, 2012 (UTC) Plagiarism again I am going to have to ask you again to stop calling things plagiarism. You are obviously checking to see if the information came from Wikipedia, so in less time than it takes you to add the Deletion template and a reason for it, you could instead add the template and show where the information came from. To say that the page should be deleted so that the history is clear is not realistic and goes against the basic principles of wikis: each person builds on the work of the people before them. To say "get rid of it" is taking the easy way out and is denying everyone else the chance to even try working to improve the page. If you are unwilling to stop calling things plagiarism and marking them for deletion, then I need to point out that two of the pages you just created should also be deleted. The opening paragraph for both Jason Alexander and Maurice LaMarche is copied verbatim from their Wikipedia pages. You just added an extra sentence onto each one, but did not give credit anywhere on either page to Wikipedia as the source of your information. Because you did not immediately have the proper licensing on these pages, by your own standard we should delete them. It would be interesting to look at each page you added since November and see how many of them have the same situation. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 03:47, January 30, 2012 (UTC) Double standard From what you put in the edit summary of the Marc Weiner‎‎ page, you are attempting to apply a double standard to your edits. I checked the two pages I mentioned. The first 73 words of the Maurice LaMarche page are copied word-for-word from Wikipedia. That is 32% of the article that is a direct copy. The first 96 words of the Jason Alexander page are copied word-for-word from Wikipedia. That is 55% of the article that is a direct copy. You said in the edit summary, "The cases are far different. This is the entire article. My pages break no laws." The issue is not laws. The issue is that you are claiming it's plagiarism if a page is 100% copied from another source, but you apparently feel it's not plagiarism if less than 100% is copied from that same source. But if you want to talk laws, then the parts of your page that are directly copied from Wikipedia violate their CC-BY-SA 3.0 license because you did not include an attribution that shows you got the text from Wikipedia. Either you can loosen up a little bit and not be so quick to label things as plagiarism that are easily remedied, or we can hold you to the same standard that you are placing on everyone else. It's your choice. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 05:18, January 30, 2012 (UTC) : Maybe you should reread what I wrote. There is no double standard going on. Please stop harassing me with your accusations--ToonNicker3 12:18, January 30, 2012 (UTC) :: This is not harassment or an accusation. I am pointing out that by your actions, you are in essence saying, "others cannot copy from Wikipedia, but I can". Plagiarism is trying to claim what someone else did as your own. Each time this has come up and I have fixed it by adding the licensing that shows where they got the information, it hasn't been good enough for you. You still insist we get rid of it. :: I am asking you to loosen up about this because this is also a form of biting the newcomers. Imagine if you were a new person and you wanted to add an article. You think, "I can just get that from Wikipedia", but either you don't know you're supposed to say so or your forget to do it. If you came back a while later and someone had put "you plagiarized this, get rid of it", would that make you feel very welcome? Would you want to stay around if you saw this was also happening to other newbies who might have made a mistake? :: For many people, the answer is no, they would not feel welcome and they would not stick around. So I am asking one more time, please stop calling things plagiarism. —RRabbit42 (leave a message) 15:57, January 30, 2012 (UTC)